In the midst of fierce debate over immigration reform, a group of Latino recording artists have recorded their own version of the national anthem as a show of solidarity. “Nuestro Himno” (“Our Anthem”) has a Latin arrangement and mostly Spanish words, but keeps the traditional structure of “The Star Spangled Banner.”

Some people are offended, including President Bush who suggested that Latinos and immigrants should take the time to learn English and then sing the national anthem in English.

Bah. We’re a culturally rich country with no official language. What’s wrong with celebrating the anthem and the freedom that defines America by singing your own cultural version of the song? Jimi Hendrix made his own version and for me it’s as patriotic as the one we sing at the ballpark. I think it’s decidely unpatriotic to say we can’t sing the national anthem with our own respectful flair.

Immigration is a tough issue–I’m not condoning illegal immigrants. We need to come up with a sensible solution. But squashing diversity isn’t the way to do it. We were all immigrants once. We evicted an entire people, co-opted their land and ditched their language. So we should be careful how loud we complain, lest we sound like a bunch of ungrateful hypocrites.

Here I am, back in the realm of politics. My dad sent me this bumper sticker yesterday and even commented on my VP shooting post, which I guess shows you the power of the VP shooting somebody to bring people together. (Which brings up a side question–is it incredibly inappropriate to make jokes about somebody getting shot? Apparently some people think it is if you’re anti-gun, which I don’t think I am, therefore I think I’m good.)

Back to the Cheney-Kennedy bumper sticker. My dad thought it was hilarious enough to pass on, which is something I don’t think I ever remember my dad doing. Ever. So I take a look at the bumper sticker–and I don’t get it.

Continue reading Hunt with Cheney or Ride with Kennedy? →

And this is exactly why I think the Dick Cheney shot a guy story is so funny.

I don’t usually jump into the political realm with this blog, but this story of Vice President Dick Cheney shooting Austin attorney Harry Whittington during a quail hunting trip is just bizarre. Apparently Whittington came up behind the group unannounced and Cheney turned around and sprayed him with buckshot. Whittington is still in the ICU (at last report) but they say he’s doing fine.

Continue reading Vice President Shoots Some Guy →

I just exercised my right to vote. Literally.

I walked the four blocks or so to my polling place on a sunny, November afternoon with the temperature in the upper 50s. Not bad. Reminds me of my walks to the bus stop. The best part was crunching through the bright yellow leaves that layered the sidewalk beneath some of the late autumn bloomer trees.

And I also got to participate in democracy, casting my vote in the St. Paul mayoral and school board elections.

Last week U.S. President George W. Bush surpassed former President Ronald Reagan’s record 335 days of vacation for a sitting president. While Reagan took eight years to set that milestone, Bush has beat it in less than five.

Now there’s a lot of ways we can go with this. You could argue that Bush is taking way too much time off when he should be leading the country. That’s a valid argument, though you launch into all sorts of questions about whether or not he works while he’s on vacation (somebody’s got to read those daily security reports) and how if you faced 9/11 and invaded two countries you’d need some time off.

Instead, I’d like to make two simple points:

1) The average American gets 12 days of vacation per year. Granted the president is no average American, but should he really get five times the vacation of the average citizen?

2) While the average American gets 12 days of vacation per year, they only use 9 of them. We’re too busy working to take a vacation. I’ve got to applaud Bush for taking a vacation and modeling for the rest of the country the importance of time off. He might be over-compensating, but he’s got the right idea.

It’s also worth pointing out that France is the most vacationing country in the world. French workers get an average of 39 vacation days per year. Apparently Bush has more in common with the French than we suspect.

The Verbatim section of the August 8, 2005 issue of Time magazine includes a quote from Senate majority leader Bill Frist defending his decision to change his stance on stem-cell research. In the attribute, Time refers to Frist as an “anti-choice physician”.

Since when did “anti-choice” become an acceptable term to describe someone who opposes abortion? For a while “pro-choice” and “pro-life” seemed to work pretty well, though lately they’ve fallen out of favor for the more direct “pro-abortion” and “anti-abortion”. But “anti-choice”? The logical extension of that would be to call those who support abortion “anti-life”. And I think that would raise a few eyebrows.

C’mon, Time. I’m not the kind of person to jump all over “liberal media,” but this is ridiculous.

Gotta love the Christianity Today editorial, Worship as Higher Politics. I’m glad somebody else is saying this.

George W. Bush is not Lord. The Declaration of Independence is not an infallible guide to Christian faith and practice. Nor is the U.S. Constitution, nor the U.N. Universal Declaration on Human Rights. “Original intent” of America’s founders is not the hermeneutical key that will guarantee national righteousness. The American flag is not the Cross. The Pledge of Allegiance is not the Creed. “God Bless America” is not the Doxology.

I don’t usually write about politics and for good reason. But this just floored me. Apparently some pharmacists are refusing to fulfill perscriptions for contraceptives on moral grounds. It seems some of the contraceptives being refused are morning-after pills, similar to the abortion pill, RU-486, though most morning-after pills can’t terminate a pregnancy. It seems it all comes down to your definition of pregnancy. The article doesn’t make it clear if standard birth control perscriptions are being refused or if it’s only controversial “emergency contraceptives.”

I guess I’m just surprised this is a political issue. I would think the drug stores wouldn’t allow their pharmacists to do that. It seems like a business issue. If a waitress refused to serve somebody for moral reasons, they’ be fired. It’s not as simple as that, but that’s the first thought that comes to my mind.

More than anything I’m surprised at the ways the pro-life cause is often acted out. It seems we often want to deal with everything when it’s too late. Denying birth control seems like a silly thing to be up in arms about, and hardly an effective way to get your message across. It just seems like a good way to piss people off.

The LA Times covers the Bush administration’s dealings with Sudan, which seem to imply that in exchange for cooperation fighting terrorism, the Bush administration has taken a softer stance on genocide in Darfur. That’s a harsh claim to make, and I’m not sure I’m ready to buy it, but it does express a brutal reality. To what length do we go to get intelligence on terrorists? Does terrorism trump genocide?

Bleh. I realize it’s not an easy choice, but it certainly is ugly. Weighing lives is always a lose-lose game.

And have I mentioned how you can take action on Darfur? It’s as simple as sending an e-mail to your representatives.